Case 1604002/2025 · Employment Tribunal
Mrs C Negoescu v Functional Healthcare Ltd — 2026
- Case reference
- 1604002/2025
- Decision date
- 3 February 2026
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge C Sharp
- Venue
- Cardiff
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mrs C Negoescu
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge C Sharp, sitting alone at Cardiff by CVP on 3 February 2026, heard the claim brought by Mrs C Negoescu against Functional Healthcare Ltd. The Claimant appeared in person; the Respondent did not attend and was debarred under Rule 22. The Tribunal also recorded a change to the Respondent's name to Functional Healthcare Ltd.
The Tribunal found each of the Claimant's three claims to be well-founded. The redundancy pay claim resulted in an award of £5,392.50 gross. The claim for unpaid wages covering May 2025 to August 2025 resulted in an award of £5,530.79 gross. The notice pay claim resulted in an award of £14,496.36 gross.
The Tribunal recorded that the Claimant is responsible for any tax or statutory deductions which may be due on the award. The judgment did not set out detailed reasoning or apply named legal tests on its face.
Claims and outcomes
3 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | Tribunal found the claim well-founded; £5,392.50 gross awarded. | Upheld | — | £5,393 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Unpaid wages for May 2025 to August 2025; £5,530.79 gross awarded. | Upheld | — | £5,531 |
| Breach of contract | Notice pay claim well-founded; £14,496.36 gross awarded. | Upheld | — | £14,496 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £25,420
- across all upheld claims
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.